EMERGING THREAT ASSESSMENTGLOBAL STRIKE MEDIA.COM NORTH AMERICA

Across the Kashmir Valley, a rippling blanket of fruit orchards and saffron fields tumbling down from the Himalayas, residents say more young men are joining militant groups, intensifying a struggle for self-determination that is as old as India itself. – Los Angeles Times

Tunisia was the sole political success story of the "Arab Spring" protest movement that swept the Arab world in 2011: the one country where a long-serving authoritarian leader was toppled without triggering violence or civil war. But six years after the uprising swept President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali into exile, Tunisia's much-praised model of democratic transition is souring for many like Ezzidine. - Reuters

Putin's Coup In the Balkans Russian nationalists were behind a foiled plot to raid the Montenegrin parliament on election day, kill the prime minister, and install a pro-Kremlin government, the government of Montenegro alleged.

Putin has tried mixing and matching shards of Russia’s fragmented history to create a version his countrymen can embrace while discarding some of the uglier material. He has tried to come up with a “national idea” for them no fewer than three times: After toying with “competitiveness” and “saving people,” earlier this year he told a meeting of regional business leaders that he had settled on “patriotism.” He has publicly asked legislators to define the “Russian nation” by law, although there is confusion about what that means. – Washington Post

Officially, Russia is participating only in an air war over Syria with a small number of special forces on the ground. Moscow denies that its troops are involved in regular ground combat operations. However, in interviews with more than a dozen people with direct knowledge of these deployments, Reuters has established that Russian fighters are playing a more substantial role in ground combat than that the role the Kremlin says is being played by the regular Russian military. - Reuters

Damir Marusic writes: [I]f the story, as I’ve tried to reconstitute it, is true and the Russians were in fact involved in a failed coup against a sovereign country trying to align itself with the West, it should give pause to those pundits who still think that a workable equilibrium with the Kremlin is somehow attainable. At the Valdai conference this past week, Russian President Vladimir Putin indicated that he increasingly saw talking to Washington as pointless. With old spies running the Russian state, the conversation appears to be going back into the shadows, where these men are most comfortable. – The American Interest

Ilya Yashin writes: The entire country is in the clutches of a venal system. In order to get access to the feeding trough of public funds, one must simply share one’s profits with those who offer protection from above. As a result, since United Russia’s rise to power, the party has established itself as a route to upward mobility for criminal elements. These criminals have adapted, and have managed to successfully integrate themselves into government bodies by using the party’s resources. – Atlantic Council

Alina Polyakova and Anton Shekhovtsov write: The West faces a revanchist Russia on Europe’s borders and the growing appeal of authoritarian regimes across the globe, it is time to remember how only twenty-five years ago, U.S. leadership and Western Europe’s resolve helped bring democratic institutions, liberal values, and economic prosperity to Central and Eastern Europe. Those values and institutions now face their greatest ideological challenges since the end of the Cold War. If the United States once again comes to the aid of Europe’s East, one of the greatest achievements of the twentieth century, the post-communist transformation of Europe, can be secured. – World Affairs Journal

Mark Schneider writes: Russia is well aware that there has been no apparent U.S. response to their INF Treaty violations. Absent a major change in policy, there would likely be little or no serious U.S. response to Russian “suspension” of its obligations under the New START Treaty. Russia has little to lose if it initiates a post-election nuclear crisis, assuming of course it does not get out of hand—which is apparently what Russian leaders believe – National Institute for Public Policy

Mike Wynne writes: China and Russia are rapidly modernizing their militaries and their cyber abilities. Iran and North Korea are on track to obtain nuclear weapons with sophisticated ballistic missile capabilities. ISIS and other Islamist terror organizations remain serious threats. The United States military must be readied to meet each of these challenges, and only Donald Trump has proposed a serious plan to do so. Our country and the world simply cannot afford another four years of military and national decline. – Breaking Defense

Jeffrey Gedmin writes: The next American President must get real about Russian mendacity and manipulation—and the rise of the new authoritarians around the world. If we fail to respond, we’ll be complicit in writing a most tragic chapter in human history, namely ”How America and its allies won the Cold War, only to throw away the peace.” And make no mistake: Get this wrong, and it will be near impossible to get anything else right. – The American InterestIlan Berman and Amanda Azinheira write: Russia’s economy, in other words, is increasingly running on empty. Whether this translates into significant, sustained opposition to Mr. Putin’s regime from the Russian “street” remains to be seen. But one thing is already clear: The Kremlin’s claim to renewed global greatness is being undermined by less-than-savory economic realities at home. Western leaders truly interested in curbing Russia’s potential for future aggression should take notice, and press their political advantage. - Forbes

Interview: In the span of six months, the U.S.-Philippines relationship has gone from a 25-year highpoint to a period of worrisome uncertainty. At the center of this shift is President Rodrigo Duterte, whose frequent anti-U.S. rhetoric and desire to shift his country’s foreign policy course signal that the U.S.-Philippines relationship will be hard pressed to maintain, let alone advance, the recent gains in strategic cooperation. The Cipher Brief spoke with Josh Kurlantzick, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, to learn more. – The Cipher Brief

Arthur Herman writes: Our next president must reverse Obama’s disastrous course. The answer to dealing with China is linkage, i.e. making it clear that bad behavior in the South China Sea will have adverse consequences in areas where China has real interests, such as economic and diplomatic ties. But for now, the path to Chinese hegemony in the Pacific is wide open. It’ll be up to the next president to close it down – National Review Online

Hugh White writes: A future Asia in which China plays a bigger leadership role would be an Asia without many things the United States values, but many people would argue that those things are not so valuable that we should contemplate fighting a nuclear war to preserve them. Unless U.S. leaders are willing publically to argue that such people are wrong and plainly convince a majority of Americans that America should and would be willing to fight a nuclear war to preserve U.S. leadership in Asia, Washington will not be able to convince China of its resolve and deter China from pursuing its ambitions. And it is hard to see any American leader stepping up to that task anytime soon. – War on the Rocks

Heather Wilson, Jacqueline Varas, and Rachel Hoff write: The rules for the future of commerce in the Asia-Pacific are being written. The only question is, who will write them? Will the United States choose to play an active role and ensure the trade regime favors U.S. interests and allies? Or will the United States sit back and allow China to fill the vacuum? Opposing TPP opens the door for China to replace the United States as the predominant regional power in the Asia-Pacific. Ultimately, that will hurt the domestic economy and foreign policy interests alike. – American Action Forum

Whether he knows it or not, Mr. Duterte is following a strategy that leaders used throughout the Cold War: balancing between the powers by threatening to change loyalties. That strategy’s track record illuminates why Mr. Duterte’s seemingly reckless actions have borne him such fruit, and may offer a hint of his goals. – New York TimesCesar Conda writes: Perhaps [Duterte] hopes his virulent anti-American rhetoric can be calibrated to please his new Chinese strategic partners, while he simultaneously maintains tenuous ties with the United States. If so, it is a dangerous calculation. Because there are limits to how much anti-American vitriol can be tolerated before America's friendship with and support for the Philippines is permanently undermined. – The Weekly Standard

The boy in the photograph, which a Western intelligence source shared exclusively with The Daily Beast, is Abdelilah Himich, who U.S. and French intelligence officials have identified as the mysterious Abu Suleyman al-Firansi, the terror operative believed to have been a prime mover of the Paris and Brussels attacks over the last year, and arguably the single most important European in ISIS. – The Daily Beast

Editorial: [A]s Mr. Obama backed away from his support for democratic change in the Middle East, so did Bahrain. The promised reforms were never implemented, and the regime instead steadily escalated repression of moderate opposition leaders and human rights activists. – Washington Post

Steven Cook writes: Today, however, the United States needs to reconsider the idea that Egypt is a force for stability. Egypt’s foreign policy has changed. Egypt is not a rogue state, but it is exporting its central domestic political conflict—the repression of the Muslim Brotherhood—to its neighbors, with devastating effect. – Foreign Affairs

Egypt’s economic and social inequalities helped ignite the populist revolts that toppled President Hosni Mubarak five years ago. Now the economy is on the skids again, as discontentment rises in the Arab world’s most populous nation. – Washington Post

Eric Trager writes: So far, Mr. Sisi’s bet that he can get away with this behavior without losing foreign assistance has been right. But Saudi Arabia’s withholding of the petroleum aid and Washington’s decision to shift more than $100 million earmarked for Egypt to other countries suggest that changes might be afoot. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Russia’s completion this month of an integrated air defense system in Syria has made an Obama administration decision to strike Syrian government installations from the air even less likely than it has been for years, and has created a substantial obstacle to the Syrian safe zones both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have advocated. – Washington PostRussian and Syrian troops suspended bombing sorties around Aleppo on Tuesday in preparation for aid convoys to reach the besieged Syrian city, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)European Union foreign ministers on Monday pledged swift action to broaden sanctions against the Assad regime in Syria and called on Russia to live up to its responsibilities and end the bombing of Aleppo immediately. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)Syrian rebels said on Tuesday they rejected any withdrawal of fighters from Aleppo after Russia announced a halt in air raids which it said was designed to allow insurgents to leave and to separate moderate fighters from extremist militants. - ReutersFPI Senior Policy Analyst Evan Moore writes: Although President Obama has long made clear that he opposes any such intervention in Syria, his inaction is not only allowing more Syrians to be killed, but also exacerbating the challenges awaiting his successor. Before his presidency ends, Mr. Obama should take decisive action to prevent the fall of Aleppo – the only path to avoid an even greater humanitarian disaster, preserve the options of his successor, and advance any hope toward the diplomatic solution he so desires. – Foreign Policy InitiativeMichael O’Hanlon writes: Confederation is not so bad. And a peace accord establishing it could always mandate a constitutional convention in, say, ten years to see whether the country can be more tightly reintegrated at that point. The dream of Syria as we knew it need not be destroyed forever. But right now, it has no relevance to the nightmare that will continue to endure if we remain so strategically unrealistic in our political vision for the country. – Brookings InstitutionOubai Shahbandar writes: Obama administration officials counter that Putin's actions in Syria are "self-defeating." Somehow, Putin has yet to get the memo. That's because for Putin, the Cold War did not end -- it has been merely re-branded. And until we have a US President who understands this fundamental point, Russia's carte blanche military intervention in Syria will only serve to undermine US strategic interests in the region -- if not worldwide. - CNNAnna Borshchevskaya and Cmdr. Jeremy Vaughan, USN write: These steps can show allies that the United States is committed to the region while giving Washington leverage to influence any future conflicts there. In the end, Putin's power is limited, but he will continue to test the West until it pushes back. And if Washington does not take a more active role in preserving its regional relationships, Putin will continue to degrade American influence. – Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Nick Danforth writes: [I]t remains to be seen whether Aleppo will prove to be Syria’s Srebrenica. But if the next president, concluding that the perception of American weakness has reached an unacceptable level, decides to strike Assad, history, for better or worse, will have repeated itself. – War on the RocksPatrick Ball writes: The Syrian civil war will eventually end, and if Syria is to turn to a more just and more democratic future, there will need to be some form of transitional justice. This process may include public acknowledgements of past crimes, criminal prosecutions, memorials, an official history written by a truth commission, or some combination of those steps. But all of these approaches depend on knowing the truth about the past. One part of that truth is the statistical pattern — the trends and magnitude of mass violence. – Foreign Policy

International air traffic to and from Iran is booming. At the country’s main airport in the capital Tehran, for instance, there were 140 more flights during a week last month than a week in May 2015 before the nuclear deal was signed. The map above uses data from FlightRadar24, a company that tracks real-time flight data. It shows a remarkable thickening in routes, as well as the narrow spindles of new ones. – Washington Post

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, the country’s elite military force, is sending assets to infiltrate the United States and Europe at the direction of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, according to recent Farsi-language comments from an Iranian military leader. – Washington Free Beacon

Russia is again deploying nuclear-capable Iskander missiles to its Kaliningrad outpost that borders two NATO members, Lithuania said Saturday, warning the move was aimed at pressuring the West into making concessions over Syria and Ukraine. - AFP

Anna Borshchevskaya writes: Russia’s long-term economic and military capabilities problems alone are not going to deter Putin. He cares less about Russia’s true well-being than projecting an image of greatness and strength, someone who stands up to the West, and especially to the US. Western policymakers should not underestimate Putin’s ability and commitment to undermine the West in the coming years. - Forbes

Jerry Hendrix writes: In the 70 years since the end of World War II, the United States military has been the guarantor of security for allies and partners around the globe. It’s time for the rest of the world to trust us, but not anticipate us. It is time to reintroduce strategic ambiguity and unpredictability back to the international conversation. It’s time to throw away the book. – The National Interest

Frederic Hof said: My overall sense, however, is that President Putin will probe until he encounters steel, and this probing will, by no means, be restricted to Syria. As someone old enough to have witnessed the probing of an American President some 55 years ago and the subsequent onset of a nuclear crisis brought about by Soviet miscalculation, I am deeply worried. – Atlantic Council

Colombia’s president tried Monday to keep alive an agreement to end Latin America’s longest-running war after a shocking rejection by voters, but his opponents made clear their price for joining the effort will be steep. – Washington PostLulled by the polls, the government failed to drive Colombians to the ballot box, resulting in anemic turnout in places that favored the deal. President Juan Manuel Santos had staked his legacy on achieving peace, but his approval ratings were so low that his endorsement may have actually hurt the deal’s chances…But for many others, the reason the deal failed was an emotional one. The agreement had always been a tug of war between peace and justice, and in the end, the demand for justice won. – New York TimesThe stunning outcome thrusts Mr. Uribe, now 64 years old and a senator, into a central role shaping what will happen next. Some Colombians see him as the only person who can renegotiate the deal in a way to convince skeptics it isn’t too lenient toward rebels who have gripped Colombia in conflict for 52 years. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)The surprise vote marked a staggering setback for Santos, who gambled his political career on winning the referendum and ending the half-century war with the leftist separatists. But the decision also dealt a blow to the United States, which spent years aiding a military offensive against the FARC rebels and then backed painstaking talks that led to the historic agreement. – Foreign PolicyEditorial: At best, the pact might be revised to provide for tougher treatment of FARC leaders guilty of crimes, while continuing to pardon rank-and-file fighters. But Mr. Londoño and his clique stoutly resisted such accountability through years of negotiations. Mr. Santos could also try to push the accord or a slightly amended version through Congress in spite of the referendum, which was nonbinding. Better, however, to accept democracy’s verdict, and look for another way forward. – Washington PostEditorial: President Obama had also thrown U.S. prestige behind the Havana pact, partly to secure his detente with Cuba. The U.S. has responded to the defeat by saying it respects democracy, and if that’s true it will avoid pressuring Mr. Santos to make more concessions and offer to help Colombia if the FARC returns to its murderous ways. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)Jose Cardenas writes: All Colombians want peace; just not at any price. Now, the decision to return to the negotiating table rests with the FARC. The burden is on them, not the state, to prove their interest in peace. If they truly are sincere in their commitment to disarm and demobilize — as they have been saying these past four years — then they need to realize that amnesty and guaranteed political participation are non-starters with the Colombian people. – National Review OnlineRoger Noriega writes: US policymakers cannot ignore the fact that the negotiations have undermined Colombia’s anti-drug efforts — suspending extraditions of FARC drug kingpins and easing up on anti-drug operations — producing a 50% increase in coca cultivation. It is urgent for the United States to redouble efforts to find and freeze FARC funds and to continue support for Colombia’s security and development efforts. – AEI Ideas

James Jeffrey and Anna Borshchevskaya write: Until now, the United States has been negotiating from a position of weakness rather than trying to build leverage, thereby encouraging Putin's aggression and making the situation ever more dangerous and unstable. Once the costs go up for Russia and other actors, Washington can negotiate again, but this time with enough clout to perhaps reach a viable political compromise in Syria. – Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Carl Gershman writes: Politkovskaya understood that there was a connection between Putin’s sudden rise to power in 1999 by inflaming anti-Chechen passions and the horrible violence that followed. In her book “A Small Corner of Hell,” she wrote about “Westernizers” in Chechnya who looked toward Europe and with whom one could make peace. But Putin saw otherwise. He used the Chechen issue to seize and consolidate his power and then to extend it. Politkovskaya saw the danger, but she and other liberals in Russia were not strong enough to stop it. – Washington Post

Alina Polyakova writes: f Western leaders are serious about bringing those responsible for the deaths of 298 innocent civilians to justice, they will have to take a clear eyed look at what Russia has become under Putin: an authoritarian state with no regard for international laws, human rights, or the deaths of civilians. In this case, justice will only come with political will. – The American InterestAlexei Sobchenko writes: The report of the Dutch-led investigation team on the shoot down of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine offered a momentary glimpse into the true nature of the proverbial riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Instead of denying any Russian involvement in the death of 298 people in July 2014, a number of official spokespersons, journalists, and bloggers known for their close ties to the Kremlin reacted nervously and with contradictory responses. – Atlantic Council

Marius Laurinavicius writes: Russia’s KGB-style mafia state will not agree to wind itself down. It can be stopped, but Western leaders must first re-examine their assumptions about Putin and about Russia. They must also prepare their voters for a long-term standoff, rather than banking on slender hopes for regime change in the foreseeable future. – The American Interest

Masha Gessen writes: The Levada Center retained its reputation as the most reliable source on Russian public opinion. Even federal ministries occasionally commissioned surveys from it. Sometimes the results of those differed little or not at all from those produced by the Kremlin-controlled pollsters. But the Levada sociologists could not be controlled by the Kremlin, and that sealed their fate. In the end, the Kremlin’s fear of information became stronger than the desire to know, just as Mr. Gudkov knew it would. – New York Times